I get the stupid stuff and posted a funny example... but.. Emojis are just Unicode code points. If you're going to allow Unicode, should you arbitrarily disallow certain ranges/glyphs because they're in a list of those assigned to emojis? What if more are added... should the compiler download lists? Or should code always have to be the Latin alphabet and symbols on keyboard? I'd say allowing Unicode is fine and it's up to developers not to be jackasses with it.

Behold the horror!
https://i.imgur.com/D0Uonre.jp...

Thanks to the Monaco editor (also used by VSCode) and twinBASIC, a language in development backwards compatible with VB6... that can also be used to write kernel mode drivers... I'll add some to my next driver project, see how many aneurysms I can cause with emoji-filled BASIC running in km. Abomination!

"Extreme far left"... where "far left" is anything short of the outright fascism of the US right and extreme far left is the rest of the world's moderate. Fuck off. Don't need to lie about right wing extremism to make the point there's a bunch of rich hypocrites in Hollywood.

So in other words, it's either having to vet every post before it goes up lest they become liable for something, or allow an endless flood of spam, porn, slurs, etc? Your plan is fucking moronic.

1) You seem to think nothing can be fucked up as long as it's still better than others. That's ridiculous.
2) Even accepting a major breaking change was necessary, it was absolutely not necessary to limit functionality -- again not being worse than Google doesn't mean they didn't fuck something up.
3) Defaults matter and the time, money, and effort spent on those was clearly detrimental to the core browser.
4) But constantly shrinking the margin by which they're better has cratered their market share and created a real danger of ceasing to exist as a meaningful alternative at all.

Good luck trying to "no stupid user, shut up and accept that our choices are better and we know better than you about what you need in a browser, plus Chrome bad!" Firefox back to the top. You angling for a job at Mozilla?

I have the feature to block malicious downloads turned off so it doesn't go sending "Metadata" off. Yesterday I had a download nonetheless blocked, in a unmistakably false positive. After confirming it was still indeed turned off in the Settings UI a search turned up that apparently that's ignored and to really turn it off you need to change some about:config setting. This kind of underhanded misleading crap is what you expect from Chrome, but nope, it was Firefox. Obviously Chrome is still much worse but it's really infuriating when the browser that markets itself as respecting privacy ignores a privacy setting.

The Commerce Clause has been interpreted so broadly that there's literally nothing that it can't apply to. Wickard and Raich held growing your own plants on your own land for exclusively your own consumption was interstate commerce because *maybe* you would have bought from another seller and that somehow maybe affects the 'overall market' which is interstate.
With that level of indirect, tenuous, theoretical possibilities based "logic" the outcome of any Commerce Clause case is decided simply by choosing the outcome desired based on politics, policy, or bribery, then working out the justification.

Lucky. In the 90s-early 2000s for me, we had a computer typing class in middle school... and in highschool... a computer typing class, and an Office class you had to be a senior to take and I had too many more important classes (I was already highly proficient in it and programming VBA for years). So for me they were just games classes. Type out the days work in 5-10min then just play games. No internet, which ironically we had in every other class and the library... in 7th grade History of all places we learned HTML to make a website for a project.
I would have loved any kind of serious computer class.

They could pack up and leave but they won't. All of the big social media CEOs are more addicted to gobbling authoritarian cock than teens are to social media. They'll comply.

Yes, clearly there's been no massive expansion of the surveillance state and loss of privacy since 1994. The slope is slippery enough you fell and hit your head.

Really doubt it's going to keep most off. Every class has at least one kid who will know how to beat the block, and that kid will show everyone else. Like probably a lot of /.ers I was that kid once... Nearly everyone certainly wanted a copy of the tools I wrote to bypass the school site blocker, and that was just with the school library computers. Nobody else in class could *make* the tools, but it made me feel cool as an unpopular nerd so I made sure to simplify it enough for everyone.
Also there's free VPNs. Teens wanting to get to a forbidden fruit don't care about the privacy and ads from them. And I'm sure other ways will be found. Whoever thinks this will keep any significant percentage off has clearly forgotten what it's like to be that age.

I asked it one of my favorites... how to do something very unusual in a specific programming language. A traditional Google search easily surfaces on the 1st page the 1 major forum thread demonstrating how it is indeed possible with a full sample and lengthy explanation, 10y old now, my 2 public GitHub projects expanding on the subject, 1 and 2y old, and articles mentioning them.
Gemini failed like all others, falsely claiming it's impossible. I'd say it failed worse than any AI yet, as it offered an mostly wrong method of using the requested language as a front end as an alternative, where others manage that at least. It then became even more nonsensical than others attempting to press forward.

Those dummies could be satisfied with a minor reskin. Completely trashing it and making it far less useful and user friendly is a deeper rot.

Even if they were, talking to strangers hasn't been proven beyond doubt to dramatically reduce the risk of something much more harmful, dipshit.

In what way? To laugh at those stupid nerds who don't use their OS right and strategize how to enshittify them more?